452 APPENDIX TO BRITISH CASE. 



the matter by the two Governments in the presence of the same evi- 

 dence of those facts for their scrutiny and judgment. 



But, a careful attention to Lord Salisbury's note discovers what 

 must be regarded as an expression of his views, at least of the author- 

 ity of Provincial legislation and administrative jurisdiction over 

 pur fishermen within the three-mile line, and of the restrictive lim- 

 itations upon their rights in these fishing-grounds under the Treaty 

 of Washington. Upon any aspect of the evidence, on one side and 

 the other, as qualifying the violent acts from which our fishing fleet 

 has suffered at the hands of the Newfoundland coast fishermen, the 

 views thus intimated seem to this Government wholly inadmissible, 

 and do not permit the least delay, on our part, in frankly stating the 

 grounds of our exception to them. 



The Report of Captain Sulivan presents, as a justificatory support 

 of the action of the Newfoundland shore fishermen in breaking up 

 the operations of our fishing fleet inside the three-mile line, at the 

 times covered by these transactions, the violation of certain munici- 

 pal legislation of the Newfoundland Government which, it is alleged, 

 our fishermen were in the act of committing when the violent inter- 

 ruption of their industry occurred. 



I do not stop to point out the serious distinction between the 

 official and judicial execution of any such laws and the orderly en- 

 forcement of their penalties after solemn trial of the right, and the 

 rage and predominant force of a volunteer multitude driving off our 

 peaceful occupants of these fishing grounds pursuing their industry 

 under a claim of right secured to them by Treaty. I reserve this 

 matter for a complete examination when the conflicting proofs are 

 in my possession. I shall assume, for my present purpose, that the 

 manner of exerting this supposed provincial authority was official, 

 judicial, and unexceptionable. 



I will state these justifications for the disturbance of our fishing 

 fleet in Captain Sulivan's own language, that I may not even inad- 

 vertently impute to Lord Salisbury's apparent adoption of them 

 any greater significance than their very language fairly imports. 



Captain Sulivan assigns the following violations of law by our 

 fishermen as the grounds of rightful interference with them on the 

 occasion in question: 



1. That the Americans were using seines for catching herring on the 6th 

 January, 1878, in direct violation of title xxvii, chap. 102, sect. 1 of the Consoli- 

 dated Statutes of Newfoundland, viz, " No person shall haul or take herring 

 by or in a seine, or other such contrivance, on or near any part of the coast 

 of this Colony or of its dependencies, or in any of the bays, harbours, or other 

 places therein, at any time between the 20th day of October and the 25th day 

 of April." 



2. That the American captains were setting and putting out seines, and 

 hauling and taking herring, on Sunday, the 6th day of January, in direct viola- 

 tion of sect. 4, chap, vii of the Act passed 26th April, 1876, entitled "An Act 

 to amend the Law relating to the Coast Fisheries," viz, " No person shall, 

 between the hours of 12 o'clock on Saturday night and 12 o'clock on Sunday 

 night, haul or take any herring, caplin, or squid with net seines, bunts, or any 

 such contrivances for the purpose of such hauling or taking." 



3. That they were barring fish, in direct violation of the continuance of the 

 same Act title xxvii, chap. 102, sect. 1 of the Consolidated Statutes of New- 

 foundland " or at any time use a seine or other contrivance for the catching 

 or taking of herrings, except by way of shooting and forthwith hauling the 

 same." 



4. That, contrary to the terms of the Treaty of Washington, in which it is 

 expressly provided that they do not interfere with the rights of private prop- 



